Gov. Chris Christie's plan for N.J. higher ed is promising

AP Photo/Mel EvansThe University of Medicine & Dentistry of New Jersey in Newark in a 2005 file photo.

This grand plan to rearrange the scattered pieces of New Jersey’s university system comes at exactly the right time.

We face a higher education system in crisis. There is not nearly enough space for the students who need a seat in public institutions. The physical plant at most schools is in serious decay. And the quality of the schools is not what it should be.

None of this should come as a surprise in a state that ranks 47th in the country on its investment in higher education, thanks to decades of declining state funding and increased tuition.

The result is that many middle-class families are forced to pay steep tuitions for only medium-quality schools, or to spend even more by sending their kids out of state. Parents face this squeeze at a time when they can least afford it.

Given all that, Gov. Chris Christie’s task force has proposed an attractive idea: remaking our universities to create three regional higher ed research hubs. This is only a first step.

We can’t really fix this problem without spending significantly more money than we do today. But this restructuring could create a system that’s far more rational. Without the current mess of spread-out campuses and conflicted missions, we’d add allure for top researchers and donors.

Money matters

Despite enjoying a reputation as the nation’s "medicine chest" for its pharmaceutical industry, New Jersey still lags in receiving medical research grants from the National Institutes of Health, the federal agency that awards money to pay researchers’ salaries, provide fellowships for promising students and help purchase advanced equipment. The top five states receiving grant money in 2010, and New Jersey:

After all, don’t forget the backdrop to all this: New Jersey must strengthen its relationships with high-tech industries such as pharmaceuticals, key to our state’s economy. We’ve got to attract more grant money, better pharmaceutical and biomedical researchers — and, of course, more jobs.

These aspects of the overhaul, in particular, seem sensible:

• Awarding Rutgers University the high-profile medical school run by the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey. Together, they could attract hundreds of millions more in research dollars.

• Allowing Gloucester County’s state college, Rowan, to take over the Camden campus of Rutgers University. It could transform this lesser-known school into a thriving public research university and give a much-needed economic boost to South Jersey.

• Refashioning UMDNJ. The school does a good job training doctors, but its troubled past of corruption doesn’t help it compete for research talent.

But we still have plenty of concerns:

• The fate of University Hospital, which provides vital charity care in Newark. Too often, the state cut this hospital’s funding and just handed UMDNJ the bill. The hospital is badly in need of equipment and infrastructure investment. But would pulling it completely out from the university’s umbrella, to be run through a public-private partnership, result in even more underfunding?

• What say the prevailing powers at Rutgers? Will they go along with this plan? While gaining a medical school is a huge boon, there’s the trade-off of losing its Camden campus, where disgruntled students and staff don’t want to be merged with a school of lesser cachet.

• This is a massive undertaking, and we don’t know yet how much it will cost. There are big questions on accreditation, bond issues, union contracts — and there will surely be personal pain. If any savings are found by eliminating redundancies, it will likely mean job losses.

• Then there’s George Norcross. The Camden County power broker, who controls the board at Rowan, practices bare-knuckle politics, but he’s also shown a real determination to lift a South Jersey area that needs it. Still, we must take steps to increase the independence of the board.

New Jersey can’t compete economically with “good but not great” universities, as Christie says. The vision he’s sketched out is promising, but there’s still a long way to go.